Matrix Games Forums

In 1933 only the Russians have some armour. USA Armour sucks until 1942....but their ships are great.

No troubles with the computer player. When the human player ends his turn before a computer player he waits for the computer to play and then send it to the next player.
We are all ready? Just waiting for lordlau1 and nefdn1?
If they fail to contact us until tomorrow then we start with 4 players, right?
All of us agree with Two Tribes proposal for map size?

Btw, made a small test with a map of the size suggested by TwoTribes, if we go foe such a map I would use big oceans map, it will give the sea oriented nations (USA, Japan, UK) better chances, while still retaining the formidable land based power of Russia and Germany.

I am all set for the UK. You have my email and I have already installed the game. I'm just waiting for it to start.

I agree with the 4 turns of peace. I agree with the big map and oceans.

Are diplomacy and allies allowed as well among humans?

I also messaged Ned, he will respond tonight.

Fair is fair...I have zero complaints -- other than I'm itching to get cracking. [;)]

We should limit how many allies a human can have or we may have everyone gang up on one or two players

yeah, Lordlau and I were talking about that. 2-3 should be the max...that would for 2-3 teams plus AI

I would choose free diplomacy, backstabbing and alliances are important aspects of this game.
Conditions for victory
1-No Victory condition, we play until a winner emerges, only one player can win
2-150 VP as Victory condition (it´s more or less 50% of total VP), no victory coalition
3-150 VP for the Winner, and his allies share the victory
4-No Victory conditions, we play until a player or coalition emerges as the victory

I would vote for 2

1 is my choice. 2 if the majority picks that.

I also agree on open ended diplomacy. What happens when someone breaks their word to people? Well, people will gang up on him and kill him. I think that's a part of strategy and war; when and how to create and break alliances.

I vote for 1, but am fine with 2.

I like 2, 1 can get tedious, as at a certain point, it's just mop up duty.

If you are going to do big oceans do something also about continent size if you leave it at the normal setting we will have a BUNCH of little islands and probably a bunch of cities that are not ports on islands with no sea access.

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

In a test game like this sure. The good old USA does not have choice SFTs.

Chuck

If you don't want USA better take it up with Bombur not sure he caught your post.

Just as note 125a has the PZIIIL and N with the same date to appear.

I think cpdeyoung means he agrees to take USA.
We can set map for Big oceans with big continents.
I will fix the PzIII issue, althought it´s unlikely to have some impact in this game.
I will create the map as soon I´m back from work.

ORIGINAL: ArmouredLion

I like 2, 1 can get tedious, as at a certain point, it's just mop up duty.

-Actually you will have mop up duty in 2. With 1, the game will likely end sooner.

"1-No Victory condition, we play until a winner emerges, only one player can win" You mean we decide? Sounded like till only one was standing, my mis read. Then 1 sounds good.

I change my vote to 1

I will certainly lead the gallant American boys.

I will also join the chorus for condition one.

Chuck

Can you transfer troops and supplies to allies in Bombur mod?

Bombur, Ned asked me to post for him. He will post tonight EST. He will join as Japan. He will vote in a few hours, but my money is on he will vote for option 1.